Re: Range excluding 0.0

[csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson)]

Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:

> > csampson@inetworld.net (me) writes:
> 
> >      This is not just theoretical musing.  I currently work in the world
> > of compasses, so a range of the form [0.0 .. 360.0) is quite natural.
> > (That notation is neither mathematical nor Ada.  I hope its meaning is
> > clear.)
> 
> It's certainly not Ada, but why do you say it's not mathematical?
> I find it ugly, but I've certainly seen in maths textbooks.
> Ignoring the ugly syntax, the concept seems quite useful.
> 
     Things might have changed since the days when I read math texts by
the bushel, but in those days the notation would have been [0, 360).
But, for the purpose of this sub-thread, who cares?  As long as what I
meant is understandable, I'm happy.

                        Charlie

-- 
All the world's a stage, and most 
of us are desperately unrehearsed.  Sean O'Casey